MicrostockGroup Sponsors


Author Topic: istock organises conference call with selected few  (Read 82086 times)

0 Members and 2 Guests are viewing this topic.

« Reply #300 on: March 16, 2011, 11:57 »
0
How can it be that Jsnover has not been contacted?
She has been elected by a vast mayority!
One step forward and two steps backwards.


ShadySue

  • There is a crack in everything
« Reply #301 on: March 16, 2011, 12:06 »
0
How can it be that Jsnover has not been contacted?
She has been elected by a vast mayority!
One step forward and two steps backwards.
That's been mystifying me.

« Reply #302 on: March 16, 2011, 12:13 »
0
I think it is probably because on the forum she had said she wouldn't sign the DNA. She may have PMed them and refused.

« Reply #303 on: March 16, 2011, 12:41 »
0
I didn't PM them and refuse.

I did make two posts; the first saying I thought it should be a discussion about multiple issues, not just fraud (i.e. search problems being so bad for so long) and a second where I said I could sign the NDA if it were clear what was proprietary and what not during the phone call.

Your guess is as good as mine as to why they made the decision they did.

« Reply #304 on: March 16, 2011, 12:55 »
0
Maybe it's like the PTOTW thread, IS asks for opinion then just ignores it anyway.  Is there any transparency with regards to who is chosen?

ShadySue

  • There is a crack in everything
« Reply #305 on: March 16, 2011, 12:59 »
0
I don't know how many banned members voted by SM, so wouldn't be visible on the forum. I voted by SM, but JoAnn was one of my choices.

« Reply #306 on: March 16, 2011, 13:18 »
0
LeggNet is in.

« Reply #307 on: March 16, 2011, 13:25 »
0
I didn't PM them and refuse.

I did make two posts; the first saying I thought it should be a discussion about multiple issues, not just fraud (i.e. search problems being so bad for so long) and a second where I said I could sign the NDA if it were clear what was proprietary and what not during the phone call.

Your guess is as good as mine as to why they made the decision they did.


I'm not sure whether I should be shocked or not as to why they didn't chose you. You got a lot of nominations. More than Leggnet, Freetransform and Nano, from what it seemed like. I don't have time to tally them up, though, but it looked like your name appeared. A lot. They are probably afraid of you. ;)

« Reply #308 on: March 16, 2011, 13:29 »
0
They are probably afraid of you. ;)

Which is even more worrying.
If this is a move towards regaining confidence and there is nothing to hide how do they even think about censoring someone elected by contributors.

lisafx

« Reply #309 on: March 16, 2011, 13:44 »
0
Correct me if I'm wrong, but have any of the people chosen ever spent time as independents before becoming Istock exclusive?  If I had to guess, JoAnn, I would say that your time as an independent, and your history of activism are the reasons you were not contacted. 

And I agree with Atwim.  It is worrying.

« Reply #310 on: March 16, 2011, 13:45 »
0

Odd how pretty much everyone else seems to feel it's a pretty standard NDA.

At worst it is effective, at best it is meaningless. It's not a problem for you/us if it is worthless.

 :)

I predict this whole thing is going to be extremely anti-climactic.

I second your prediction.

« Reply #311 on: March 16, 2011, 13:50 »
0
They are probably afraid of you. ;)

Which is even more worrying.
If this is a move towards regaining confidence and there is nothing to hide how do they even think about censoring someone elected by contributors.

+1

I'm telling you, this is a textbook exercise in wagging the dog and,

Oh look - a squirrel!

« Reply #312 on: March 16, 2011, 14:04 »
0
Although I voted for JoAnn and not for some of the other people selectioned that doesn't mean that those selected won't do a great job representing the community. 

« Reply #313 on: March 16, 2011, 14:05 »
0
I'm completely flabbergasted then as to why you weren't contacted. Your name was mentioned almost as many times as locke.

lisafx

« Reply #314 on: March 16, 2011, 14:11 »
0
Although I voted for JoAnn and not for some of the other people selectioned that doesn't mean that those selected won't do a great job representing the community. 

My concern over their ignoring JoAnn's MANY nominations isn't because I don't trust the people selected to do a good job.  They are all great people with integrity AFAIK.  What worries me is why she would have been omitted. 

« Reply #315 on: March 16, 2011, 14:24 »
0
There was a post asking if the votes would be posted for us to see, and wondering why jsnover wasn't one of the 5.

A post that has gone mysteriously absent. Hmmmm.

« Reply #316 on: March 16, 2011, 14:34 »
0
There was a post asking if the votes would be posted for us to see, and wondering why jsnover wasn't one of the 5.

A post that has gone mysteriously absent. Hmmmm.

Typical iStock transparency.

« Reply #317 on: March 16, 2011, 14:37 »
0
Nothing against him, but why Whiteway?

« Reply #318 on: March 16, 2011, 14:41 »
0
Just wanted to add my comment that I have confidence in the people selected. I am guessing it wasn't strictly a tally the votes process, but as long as Sean's leading the parade, I can't imagine anyone will be able to pull any fast ones.

If they were going to hand pick people, however, why go through the process of asking contributors for input? Does make me wonder who I've pissed off though :)

« Reply #319 on: March 16, 2011, 14:57 »
0

If they were going to hand pick people, however, why go through the process of asking contributors for input?
Probably the same reason they asked for input about PTOTW. To give the appearance as though what contributors say matters. And then they go ahead and do whatever they want anyway.

There is no way they are going to say anything in this conference call that is going to make any of the Fab 5 say anything negative.

I'd say go ahead and organize that audit, folks!

« Reply #320 on: March 16, 2011, 15:31 »
0
Just wanted to add my comment that I have confidence in the people selected. I am guessing it wasn't strictly a tally the votes process, but as long as Sean's leading the parade, I can't imagine anyone will be able to pull any fast ones.

If they were going to hand pick people, however, why go through the process of asking contributors for input? Does make me wonder who I've pissed off though :)

Maybe you were just too articulate in pointing out their flaws and the injustice. Thats why i never post anything overtly negative in that forum and my secret identity over here.

« Reply #321 on: March 16, 2011, 15:52 »
0
Without jsnover on board, who clearly was second most popular choice and the one with the most gravitas, I wouldn't want to be one of the five they picked. This little plan of theirs will backfire. They are afraid, and that must mean the issues aren't being dealt with as they should.

Now we need a campaign to get jsnover in on that call, get them to admit how the voting went!

« Reply #322 on: March 16, 2011, 16:08 »
0
As JoAnn has said before that she's considered/considering going independent again, I think it is what Rob said yesterday, the belief that independents can't be trusted.

lisafx

« Reply #323 on: March 16, 2011, 16:13 »
0

Now we need a campaign to get jsnover in on that call, get them to admit how the voting went!

While I completely agree I would have liked to see her on that call, I think it is a waste of time to campaign for her.  Our time would be better spent organizing an audit.  The whole phone call thing is an intentional distraction.

« Reply #324 on: March 16, 2011, 16:15 »
0

Now we need a campaign to get jsnover in on that call, get them to admit how the voting went!

While I completely agree I would have liked to see her on that call, I think it is a waste of time to campaign for her.  Our time would be better spent organizing an audit.  The whole phone call thing is an intentional distraction.

I think that's absolutely right. Because now there are apparently more than 5, according to Andrew? Typical istock, just make the crap up as they go along.


 

Related Topics

  Subject / Started by Replies Last post
4 Replies
4431 Views
Last post April 07, 2011, 21:28
by madelaide
58 Replies
18042 Views
Last post May 04, 2011, 16:23
by donding
5 Replies
3203 Views
Last post May 06, 2011, 13:09
by caspixel
0 Replies
1916 Views
Last post August 07, 2013, 19:25
by WarrenPrice
1 Replies
3836 Views
Last post April 28, 2017, 11:27
by Niakris

Sponsors

Mega Bundle of 5,900+ Professional Lightroom Presets

Microstock Poll Results

Sponsors